Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 48 Filed 11/26/18 Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Jennifer Chang Newell (SBN 233033) Cody Wofsy (SBN 294179) Julie Veroff (SBN 310161) Spencer Amdur**** (SBN 320069) ACLU FOUNDATION IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS PROJECT 39 Drumm Street San Francisco, CA 94111 T: (415) 343-0770 F: (415) 395-0950 jnewell@aclu.org cwofsy@aclu.org jveroff@aclu.org samdur@aclu.org 8 Lee Gelernt* Judy Rabinovitz* Omar C. Jadwat* Anand Balakrishnan*** Celso Perez (SBN 304924) ACLU FOUNDATION IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS PROJECT 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 T: (212) 549-2660 F: (212) 549-2654 lgelernt@aclu.org jrabinovitz@aclu.org ojadwat@aclu.org abalakrishnan@aclu.org cperez@aclu.org 9 10 Attorneys for Plaintiffs (Additional counsel listed on following page) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al., Defendants. Case No.: 18-cv-06810-JST STIPULATION IMMIGRATION ACTION Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 48 Filed 11/26/18 Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Melissa Crow*** SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER 1666 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20009 T: (202) 355-4471 F: (404) 221-5857 melissa.crow@splcenter.org Mary Bauer** SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER 1000 Preston Avenue Charlottesville, VA 22903 T: (470) 606-9307 F: (404) 221-5857 mary.bauer@splcenter.org 9 10 11 12 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 13 *Admitted pro hac vice **Application for pro hac vice pending ***Pro hac vice application forthcoming **** Application for admission forthcoming 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Baher Azmy* Angelo Guisado* Ghita Schwarz* CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS 666 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, NY 10012 T: (212) 614-6464 F: (212) 614-6499 bazmy@ccrjustice.org aguisado@ccrjustice.org gshwartz@aclu.org Christine P. Sun (SBN 218701) Vasudha Talla (SBN 316219) AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, INC. 39 Drumm Street San Francisco, CA 94111 T: (415) 621-2493 F: (415) 255-8437 csun@aclunc.org vtalla@aclunc.org Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 48 Filed 11/26/18 Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 Pursuant to the Court’s order of November 19, 2018, the parties hereby stipulate to the following briefing schedule for Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.  Plaintiffs’ motion and memorandum in support due December 3  Amicus briefs in support of Plaintiffs or neither party due December 5 6  Defendants’ opposition due December 12 at noon Pacific Standard Time 7  Amicus briefs in support of Defendants due December 12 at noon Pacific Standard Time 8  Plaintiffs’ reply due December 14  Hearing December 19 4 5 9 10 11 12 13 The parties have not been able to agree on a date for the submission of the administrative record, and state as folliows: Plaintiffs believe the administrative record should be submitted in accordance with the 14 Court’s order, and as the Government agreed at the hearing they would. To allow Plaintiffs 15 sufficient time to address the record, Plaintiffs believe it should be submitted by November 28, 2018 16 17 18 19 at noon Pacific Standard Time. Plaintiffs have been willing to negotiate with Defendants regarding the date for production of the administrative record, but do not understand the Court’s order to mean that submitting the administrative record is optional, or that the administrative record can be 20 submitted without giving Plaintiffs sufficient time to respond to the record, or that the date of 21 producing the record hinges on whether Plaintiffs ultimately choose to submit additional materials. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Defendants’ respectfully request an additional day to confer with Plaintiffs concerning production of any administrative record and the scope of that record—and request that the Court direct Plaintiffs to confer with Defendants on that issue—because Plaintiffs have not provided Defendants with the information needed to submit a timeline for producing that record. Defendants have requested Plaintiffs’ position on whether resolution of Plaintiffs’ forthcoming preliminaryinjunction motion should be limited to the administrative record or whether Plaintiffs instead believe Stipulation 1 Case No. 18-cv-06810 Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 48 Filed 11/26/18 Page 4 of 5 1 they may submit extra-record evidence in support of their motion. Plaintiffs have thus far declined 2 to confer with Defendants on this issue. Because the scope of the materials relevant to this Court’s 3 resolution of the forthcoming preliminary-injunction motion affects when an administrative record 4 should be filed and scheduling for further briefing, Defendants respectfully submit that Plaintiffs’ 5 proposed deadline of November 28 is too soon and request that the Court order the parties to meet 6 7 8 9 and confer on those issues and submit a joint proposal or competing proposals by November 27, 2018. Plaintiffs claim that they “have been willing to negotiate with Defendants regarding the date for production of the administrative record.” But this misses the point: Plaintiffs have refused to 10 address the scope of the record—even though the scope of the record is central to any such 11 negotiations and central to whatever is produced. Plaintiffs also suggest that “the Government 12 agreed at the hearing” to submit the administrative record on a particular timeframe. But Plaintiffs 13 14 15 16 overlook that, in addressing the production of the administrative record, the Government was steadfast at the hearing that review in this case would be limited to the administrative record. Plaintiffs have pointedly refused to join that commitment as to the scope of the record, which has, in 17 turn, undermined the ability of the parties to meaningfully confer about producing the record. 18 Indeed, far from being willing to agree that this is administrative-record-review case, Plaintiffs have 19 refused to agree not to submit extra-record evidence through declarations with their preliminary- 20 injunction reply brief—even though Plaintiffs have brought a purely APA challenge. Defendants 21 22 23 therefore respectfully rquest that the Court require Plaintiffs to confer with Defendants about this issue 24 25 26 27 28 Stipulation 2 Case No. 18-cv-06810 Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 48 Filed 11/26/18 Page 5 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Dated: November 26, 2018 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Erez Reuveni EREZ REUVENI Assistant Director Office of Immigration Litigation U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division P.O. Box 868, Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 Tel: (202) 307-4293 Email: Erez.R.Reuveni@usdoj.gov /s/Lee Gelernt Lee Gelernt AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS PROJECT 125 Broad St., 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 T: (212) 549-2660 F: (212) 549-2654 lgelernt@aclu.org 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 I attest that concurrence in the filing of the document has been obtained from Erez Reuveni. 24 25 26 /s/Lee Gelernt Lee Gelernt 27 28 Stipulation 3 Case No. 18-cv-06810 Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 48-1 Filed 11/26/18 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, et al., 13 Plaintiffs, 14 v. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al., Defendants. Case No.: 18-cv-06810-JST [PROPOSED] ORDER IMMIGRATION ACTION Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 48-1 Filed 11/26/18 Page 2 of 2 1 2 3 On consideration of the parties’ stipulation regarding the briefing schedule for Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:  Plaintiffs’ motion and memorandum in support due December 3  Amicus briefs in support of Plaintiffs or neither party due December 5 6  Defendants’ opposition due December 12 at noon Pacific Standard Time 7  Amicus briefs in support of Defendants due December 12 at noon Pacific Standard Time 8  Plaintiffs’ reply due December 14  A hearing will be held December 19 at 9:30 a.m.  The Court shall issue a separate order concerning the submission of an administrative record 4 5 9 10 11 12 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: ________________________ JON S. TIGAR United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [Proposed] Order 1 Case No. 18-cv-06810